scholarly journals Using Situation Awareness and Workload to Predict Performance in Submarine Track Management: A Multilevel Approach

Author(s):  
Shayne Loft ◽  
Lisa Jooste ◽  
Yanqi Ryan Li ◽  
Timothy Ballard ◽  
Samuel Huf ◽  
...  

Objective: Examine the extent to which subjective workload and situation awareness (SA) can predict variance in performance at the between- and within-person levels of analysis in a simulated submarine track management task. Background: SA and workload are crucial constructs in human factors that are conceptualized as states that change within individuals over time. Thus, a change in an individual’s subjective workload or SA over the course of performing a task should be predictive of their subsequent performance (within-person effects). However, there is little empirical evidence for this. Method: Participants monitored displays to track the behaviors of contacts in relationship to their own ship (Ownship) and landmarks. The Situational Awareness Global Assessment Technique measured SA, and the Air Traffic Workload Input Technique measured subjective workload. Results: When a participant’s subjective workload rating increased, their subsequent performance decreased, but there was no evidence for within-person effects of SA on performance. We replicated prior between-person level effects of SA; participants with higher SA performed better than those with lower SA. Conclusion: Change in an individual’s subjective workload rating (but not SA) was predictive of their subsequent performance. Because an increase in SA should increase the extent to which operators hold the knowledge required to perform subsequent tasks, further research is required to examine SA effects on performance at the within-person level. Application: Adapting automation is more likely to produce optimal outcomes if based on measurement of operator states that predict future task performance, such as workload.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arsène Ljubenovic ◽  
Sadiq Said ◽  
Julia Braun ◽  
Bastian Grande ◽  
Michaela Kolbe ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Inadequate situational awareness accounts for two-thirds of preventable complications in anesthesia. An essential tool for situational awareness in the perioperative setting is the patient monitor. However, the conventional monitor has several weaknesses. Avatar-based patient monitoring may address these shortcomings and promote situation awareness, a prerequisite for good decision making. OBJECTIVE The spatial distribution of visual attention is a fundamental process for achieving adequate situation awareness and thus a potential quantifiable surrogate for situation awareness. Moreover, measuring visual attention with a head-mounted eye-tracker may provide insights into usage and acceptance of the new avatar-based patient monitoring modality. METHODS This prospective eye-tracking study compared anesthesia providers' visual attention on conventional and avatar-based patient monitors during simulated critical anesthesia events. We defined visual attention, measured as fixation count and dwell time, as our primary outcome. We correlated visual attention with the potential confounders: performance in managing simulated critical anesthesia events (task performance), work experience, and profession. We used mixed linear models to analyze the results. RESULTS Fifty-two teams performed 156 simulations. After a manual quality check of the eye-tracking footage, we excluded 57 simulations due to technical problems and quality issues. Participants had a median of 198 (IQR 92.5 – 317.5) fixations on the patient monitor with a median dwell time of 30.2 (IQR 14.9 – 51.3) seconds. We found no significant difference in participants' visual attention when using avatar-based patient monitoring or conventional patient monitoring. However, we found that with each percentage point of better task performance, the number of fixations decreased by about 1.39 (coefficient -1.39; 95%CI: -2.44 to -0.34; P=0.02), and the dwell time diminished by 0.23 seconds (coefficient -0.23; 95%CI: -0.4 to -0.06; P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS Using eye-tracking, we found no significant difference in visual attention when anesthesia providers used avatar-based monitoring or conventional patient monitoring in simulated critical anesthesia events. However, we identified visual attention in conjunction with task performance as a surrogate for situational awareness. CLINICALTRIAL Business Management System for Ethics Committees Number Req-2020-00059


Author(s):  
Eric McMillan ◽  
Michael Tyworth

In this chapter the authors present a new framework for the study of situation awareness in computer network defense (cyber-SA). While immensely valuable, the research to date on cyber-SA has overemphasized an algorithmic level of analysis to the exclusion of the human actor. Since situation awareness, and therefore cyber-SA, is a human cognitive process and state, it is essential that future cyber-SA research account for the human-in-the-loop. To that end, the framework in this chapter presents a basis for examining cyber-SA at the cognitive, system, work, and enterprise levels of analysis. In describing the framework, the authors present examples of research that are emblematic of each type of analysis.


Author(s):  
Monica Tatasciore ◽  
Vanessa K. Bowden ◽  
Troy A.W. Visser ◽  
Stephanie Chen ◽  
Shayne Loft

Automation that supports our workplaces is intended to relieve the requirement for humans to control tasks, as a way to reduce operator workload and maximize system capacity. Researchers have long recognized the potential costs associated with automation. These costs include the loss of an operator’s understanding of a task and an inability to anticipate future task events ( situation awareness; SA; Endsley, 1995) that can occur due to automation induced complacency (Parasuraman, Molloy, & Singh, 1993), and the subsequent lack of ability to regain manual control after automation (Kaber & Endsley, 2004). These costs to automation are more likely to occur when the degree of automation (DOA) increases. DOA has been defined based on whether automation is doing more or less ‘work’ ( levels of automation; Sheridan & Verplank, 1978), and at which of the four stages of human information processing the automation is directed; information acquisition, information analysis, decision selection, and action implementation ( stages of automation; Parasuraman, Sheridan, & Wickens, 2000). As the DOA increases, performance and workload tend to improve. However, SA and return-to-manual performance can decline. Recent research by Chen, Huf, Visser, and Loft (2017) reported that a low DOA had minimal benefits to performance and workload, and also impaired SA and non-automated task performance compared to a manual control condition in a simulated submarine track management task. However, the low DOA did not lead to any return-to-manual deficits when automation was unexpectedly removed. The current study compared the effects of low and high DOA on operator performance, workload, SA, non-automated task performance, and return-to-manual performance in submarine track management. Participants ( N= 122) monitored a tactical display that presented the location and heading of contacts in relation to the Ownship and landmarks, and a ‘waterfall’ display that presented sonar bearings of contacts and how those bearings change with time. Participants performed three tasks: classification, closest point of approach (CPA), and dive. The classification task involved classifying contacts depending on how long they had spent within display regions. The CPA task involved monitoring changes in contact heading to determine their closest point of approach to the Ownship. The dive task involved integrating contact location and heading information to determine when the submarine could safely dive. Automated assistance was provided for the classification and CPA tasks, but not for the dive task. The low DOA condition received information acquisition and analysis support (stages 1 and 2), whereas the high DOA received decision selection support (stage 3). In a mixed design, the between-subjects factor was condition (no automation, high DOA, low DOA) and the within-subjects factor was automation state (routine, automation removal). Participants completed three track management scenarios, and during the last scenario the automation was unexpectedly removed. Firstly, we predicted that a high DOA would have larger benefits to performance and workload compared to a low DOA, but that these benefits might be accompanied by costs to SA, non-automated task performance, and return-to-manual performance. Secondly, we predicted that a low DOA would show minimal benefits to performance and workload, significant costs to SA and non-automated task performance, and no effect on return-to-manual performance when compared to no automation, thus replicating the findings of Chen et al. (2017). The results from this study indicated that relative to the low DOA condition, participants provided with high DOA support had better performance and lower workload, without any further costs to SA, non-automated task performance, or return-to-manual performance. Furthermore, relative to no automation, participants provided with low DOA support only had minor benefits to performance (replicating Chen et al., 2017) and no benefits to workload, and significant costs to SA and non-automated task performance. In summary, the high DOA produced larger benefits to performance and workload than the low DOA, without increasing costs. In light of these results, the automated system that recommended decisions was effectively utilized by operators in the current context, and appeared to be superior to the automated system that supported information acquisition and analysis.


Author(s):  
Monica Tatasciore ◽  
Vanessa K. Bowden ◽  
Troy A. W. Visser ◽  
Steph I. C. Michailovs ◽  
Shayne Loft

Objective The objective of this study is to examine the effects of low and high degree of automation (DOA) on performance, subjective workload, situation awareness (SA), and return-to-manual control in simulated submarine track management. Background Theory and meta-analytic evidence suggest that as DOA increases, operator performance improves and workload decreases, but SA and return-to-manual control declines. Research also suggests that operators have particular difficulty regaining manual control if automation provides incorrect advice. Method Undergraduate student participants completed a submarine track management task that required them to track the position and behavior of contacts. Low DOA supported information acquisition and analysis, whereas high DOA recommended decisions. At a late stage in the task, automation was either unexpectedly removed or provided incorrect advice. Results Relative to no automation, low DOA moderately benefited performance but impaired SA and non-automated task performance. Relative to no automation and low DOA, high DOA benefited performance and lowered workload. High DOA did impair non-automated task performance compared with no automation, but this was equivalent to low DOA. Participants were able to return-to-manual control when they knew low or high DOA was disengaged, or when high DOA provided incorrect advice. Conclusion High DOA improved performance and lowered workload, at no additional cost to SA or return-to-manual performance when compared with low DOA. Application Designers should consider the likely level of uncertainty in the environment and the consequences of return-to-manual deficits before implementing low or high DOA.


Author(s):  
Monica Tatasciore ◽  
Vanessa K. Bowden ◽  
Troy A. W. Visser ◽  
Shayne Loft

Objective To examine the effects of action recommendation and action implementation automation on performance, workload, situation awareness (SA), detection of automation failure, and return-to-manual performance in a submarine track management task. Background Theory and meta-analytic evidence suggest that with increasing degrees of automation (DOA), operator performance improves and workload decreases, but SA and return-to-manual performance declines. Method Participants monitored the location and heading of contacts in order to classify them, mark their closest point of approach (CPA), and dive when necessary. Participants were assigned either no automation, action recommendation automation, or action implementation automation. An automation failure occurred late in the task, whereby the automation provided incorrect classification advice or implemented incorrect classification actions. Results Compared to no automation, action recommendation automation benefited automated task performance and lowered workload, but cost nonautomated task performance. Action implementation automation resulted in perfect automated task performance (by default) and lowered workload, with no costs to nonautomated task performance, SA, or return-to-manual performance compared to no automation. However, participants provided action implementation automation were less likely to detect the automation failure compared to those provided action recommendations, and made less accurate classifications immediately after the automation failure, compared to those provided no automation. Conclusion Action implementation automation produced the anticipated benefits but also caused poorer automation failure detection. Application While action implementation automation may be effective for some task contexts, system designers should be aware that operators may be less likely to detect automation failures and that performance may suffer until such failures are detected.


2014 ◽  
pp. 322-336
Author(s):  
Eric McMillan ◽  
Michael Tyworth

In this chapter the authors present a new framework for the study of situation awareness in computer network defense (cyber-SA). While immensely valuable, the research to date on cyber-SA has overemphasized an algorithmic level of analysis to the exclusion of the human actor. Since situation awareness, and therefore cyber-SA, is a human cognitive process and state, it is essential that future cyber-SA research account for the human-in-the-loop. To that end, the framework in this chapter presents a basis for examining cyber-SA at the cognitive, system, work, and enterprise levels of analysis. In describing the framework, the authors present examples of research that are emblematic of each type of analysis.


1984 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Thomas Eggemeier ◽  
Brian E. Melville ◽  
Mark S. Crabtree

Information ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 162
Author(s):  
Soyeon Kim ◽  
René van Egmond ◽  
Riender Happee

In automated driving, the user interface plays an essential role in guiding transitions between automated and manual driving. This literature review identified 25 studies that explicitly studied the effectiveness of user interfaces in automated driving. Our main selection criterion was how the user interface (UI) affected take-over performance in higher automation levels allowing drivers to take their eyes off the road (SAE3 and SAE4). We categorized user interface (UI) factors from an automated vehicle-related information perspective. Short take-over times are consistently associated with take-over requests (TORs) initiated by the auditory modality with high urgency levels. On the other hand, take-over requests directly displayed on non-driving-related task devices and augmented reality do not affect take-over time. Additional explanations of take-over situation, surrounding and vehicle information while driving, and take-over guiding information were found to improve situational awareness. Hence, we conclude that advanced user interfaces can enhance the safety and acceptance of automated driving. Most studies showed positive effects of advanced UI, but a number of studies showed no significant benefits, and a few studies showed negative effects of advanced UI, which may be associated with information overload. The occurrence of positive and negative results of similar UI concepts in different studies highlights the need for systematic UI testing across driving conditions and driver characteristics. Our findings propose future UI studies of automated vehicle focusing on trust calibration and enhancing situation awareness in various scenarios.


2006 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 381-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. S. Fatima ◽  
M. J. Wooldridge ◽  
N. R. Jennings

This paper studies bilateral multi-issue negotiation between self-interested autonomous agents. Now, there are a number of different procedures that can be used for this process; the three main ones being the package deal procedure in which all the issues are bundled and discussed together, the simultaneous procedure in which the issues are discussed simultaneously but independently of each other, and the sequential procedure in which the issues are discussed one after another. Since each of them yields a different outcome, a key problem is to decide which one to use in which circumstances. Specifically, we consider this question for a model in which the agents have time constraints (in the form of both deadlines and discount factors) and information uncertainty (in that the agents do not know the opponent's utility function). For this model, we consider issues that are both independent and those that are interdependent and determine equilibria for each case for each procedure. In so doing, we show that the package deal is in fact the optimal procedure for each party. We then go on to show that, although the package deal may be computationally more complex than the other two procedures, it generates Pareto optimal outcomes (unlike the other two), it has similar earliest and latest possible times of agreement to the simultaneous procedure (which is better than the sequential procedure), and that it (like the other two procedures) generates a unique outcome only under certain conditions (which we define).


Author(s):  
Samira Ahangari ◽  
Mansoureh Jeihani ◽  
Anam Ardeshiri ◽  
Md Mahmudur Rahman ◽  
Abdollah Dehzangi

Distracted driving is known to be one of the main causes of crashes in the United States, accounting for about 40% of all crashes. Drivers’ situational awareness, decision-making, and driving performance are impaired as a result of temporarily diverting their attention from the primary task of driving to other unrelated tasks. Detecting driver distraction would help in adapting the most effective countermeasures. To tackle this problem, we employed a random forest (RF) classifier, one of the best classifiers that has attained promising results for a wide range of problems. Here, we trained RF using the data collected from a driving simulator, in which 92 participants drove under six different distraction scenarios of handheld calling, hands-free calling, texting, voice command, clothing, and eating/drinking on four different road classes (rural collector, freeway, urban arterial, and local road in a school zone). Various driving performance measures such as speed, acceleration, throttle, lane changing, brake, collision, and offset from the lane center were investigated. Using the RF method, we achieved 76.5% prediction accuracy on the independent test set, which is over 8.2% better than results reported in previous studies. We also obtained a 76.6% true positive rate, which is 14% better than those reported in previous studies. Such results demonstrate the preference of RF over other machine learning methods to identify driving distractions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document